Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

What evidence we have is that army lists that include him and are also purpose buikt to beat marines (the only other codex of the edition so far) are doing fine against the thing they are being purpose built to beat. That trend could continue. It could not. But right now its what people call a bad data pool. Its an interesting data point sure. But thats it. Nothing more. Nothing less.

From my general understanding of necrons and the model i dont personally feel that a single C'tan power is a crazy thing to give such a centerpiece model. Further data could change my opinion or cement it. I am not super committed either way until i see more data.

I will say, from a mechanical perspective, it's rather odd that the Silent King doesn't have any C'tan powers.

I mean, if the C'tan was more subtle I could maybe understand it - but it seems to have been designed to be one of the most eye-catching features. Hence, it's a little strange that it seems purely decorational and has no effect in-game.

To be clear, I'm not saying it should get a C'tan power for free. Just it seems odd that it doesn't get one at all.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
There really isnt a right and wrong yet. I voiced an opinion for a model that has seen very little play and against a single other codex. The data pool we have is shallow at best. Nobody knows how this is going to shake out.

The evidence we have is that he's working well in the current meta. How is that giving you any reason to buff this model?

Maybe it's just because I'm coming at this without the baggage of some personal squabble you two seem to be having, but I didn't take the original point about adding a C'Tan power to mean adding one for free. It seemed to be more a general observation that the model very prominently features an imprisoned C'Tan and therefore it's odd he doesn't seem to do anything in the model's rules.

It seems like the Silent King is pretty good, probably not underpowered, but I don't think there'd be a problem with adding a C'Tan power to the model provided the cost went up appropriately. Doesn't need it, but it seems thematically accurate for the model to have one.

Silent king is utter garbage for his cost. Crons are presenting with one of the worst win rates in competitive. No way of knowing how many are running silent king. They all have access to him though.

You can still win a game with a model that is 100 points overvalued. Especially when the game revolves mostly around maneuver now - fighting inside what amounts to city blocks with very few fire lanes. So if that's what you mean by "fine" then I agree. He's still better than say a...land raider.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Silent king is utter garbage for his cost. Crons are presenting with one of the worst win rates in competitive. No way of knowing how many are running silent king. They all have access to him though.

You can still win a game with a model that is 100 points overvalued. Especially when the game revolves mostly around maneuver now - fighting inside what amounts to city blocks with very few fire lanes. So if that's what you mean by "fine" then I agree. He's still better than say a...land raider.

Didn't you, not more than a week or so ago, say you had a Necron list that would just stomp all over any Marine list?

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Silent king is utter garbage for his cost. Crons are presenting with one of the worst win rates in competitive. No way of knowing how many are running silent king. They all have access to him though.

You can still win a game with a model that is 100 points overvalued. Especially when the game revolves mostly around maneuver now - fighting inside what amounts to city blocks with very few fire lanes. So if that's what you mean by "fine" then I agree. He's still better than say a...land raider.

Didn't you, not more than a week or so ago, say you had a Necron list that would just stomp all over any Marine list?

I don't believe I used that exact wording. I have claimed many times that Crons matchup quite well against space marines. They are pretty bad against...
Custodians
Deamons
Harliquens

where literally every unit in the army has an invune save crons really struggle. Custodians and quinns. I am really not sure how a cron army is supposed to defeat a full cheesed out custodian or quin army. Silent king wouldn't help here ether. Quinn bikers will just 1 shot SK with mortal wounds - they actually have the mobility to find a shot too. Custodians just win the battle of attrition and crons have no unit to really match up in melee with their hard hitters...maybe wraths?

Tesla for Harlequins but that requires more list tailoring.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Tesla for Harlequins but that requires more list tailoring.

Exactly. Tesla is so worthless vs the average unit on the table - you pretty much can't include it.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Silent king is utter garbage for his cost. Crons are presenting with one of the worst win rates in competitive. No way of knowing how many are running silent king. They all have access to him though.

You can still win a game with a model that is 100 points overvalued. Especially when the game revolves mostly around maneuver now - fighting inside what amounts to city blocks with very few fire lanes. So if that's what you mean by "fine" then I agree. He's still better than say a...land raider.

What are you talking about? Maybe that was true before the Codex, but not anymore.

Here is the quote from Goonhammer about that:

Necrons are back, baby
In news that shouldn’t be a shock, Necron usage is way up since the new book dropped. 524 games with Necrons were recorded in the ITC Battles app after the new books went on sale; this was more than any other faction save Space Marines (786), for whom a new book was also released. And in other news, the new book is a significant improvement over the last one, since there was really no way to go but up: Over this time, Necrons have won 54.4% of their games, and that’s a massive jump from the 37.7% win percentage they were posting before the new Codex. In our sample, new Necrons sport a 67% go-first win rate and a 45% go-second win rate, though these numbers will likely even out over time.

So they don't have anywhere near one of the worst winrates anymore.

Secondly, Necrons have already won several smaller RTT with Silent King lists, and they just came in 3rd at a larger GT here: https://www.40kstats.com/kentwargamesgt

If you think the Silent King is 100 points over pointed you are absolutely nuts, and you are demonstrably wrong about the Current Necron winrate.

You can't take the data right now to mean much of anything. This is the Silent King in basically optimal circumstances. It's an entirely new unit that people are unfamiliar with. It is fighting mostly the single other codex in the edition. Necrons can be purpose built to do well against that one other codex.

This is PRIME Silent King time. As people learn how to deal with him effectively and more codexes release so that necron lists are not actually tailored to trump their only competition THEN you will see what he is actually worth.

 Lance845 wrote:
You can't take the data right now to mean much of anything. This is the Silent King in basically optimal circumstances. It's an entirely new unit that people are unfamiliar with. It is fighting mostly the single other codex in the edition. Necrons can be purpose built to do well against that one other codex.

This is PRIME Silent King time. As people learn how to deal with him effectively and more codexes release so that necron lists are not actually tailored to trump their only competition THEN you will see what he is actually worth.

While I agree no one should draw full conclusions at this point, the data does mean something.

Additionally, saying the the Necron codex is just mostly fighting the Space Marine codex is just flat out wrong as well. If a Necron list cannot handle Harlequins, Daemons, Sisters, and Custodes in addition to SM it is not going to be winning or even placing in a RTT or GT. All of these armies are winning RTT and GTs, and if the Necron list isn't prepared to take them, they are going to lose.

So I an agree we should wait to draw absolute conclusions, but you are also coming from an incorrect angle in assuming that the Necrons are only tailoring for Space Marines, which is just not the case.

 Sasori wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
You can't take the data right now to mean much of anything. This is the Silent King in basically optimal circumstances. It's an entirely new unit that people are unfamiliar with. It is fighting mostly the single other codex in the edition. Necrons can be purpose built to do well against that one other codex.

This is PRIME Silent King time. As people learn how to deal with him effectively and more codexes release so that necron lists are not actually tailored to trump their only competition THEN you will see what he is actually worth.

While I agree no one should draw full conclusions at this point, the data does mean something.

Additionally, saying the the Necron codex is just mostly fighting the Space Marine codex is just flat out wrong as well. If a Necron list cannot handle Harlequins, Daemons, Sisters, and Custodes in addition to SM it is not going to be winning or even placing in a RTT or GT. All of these armies are winning RTT and GTs, and if the Necron list isn't prepared to take them, they are going to lose.

So I an agree we should wait to draw absolute conclusions, but you are also coming from an incorrect angle in assuming that the Necrons are only tailoring for Space Marines, which is just not the case.

I am saying that they are MOSTLY tailoring against SM right now in this very brief window since his release. There is a world wide pandemic and lock downs happening. We don't have good tourney data to gather.

My point that I have made twice is that our data pool is shallow and the data we are getting from it isn't very good.

I said before it's an interesting data point. But thats it. It's only a data point. It won't be for another 6ish months at least before we start to see anything really worth analyzing. Making any definitive claims about his perceived balance or lack there of at this stage is extremely premature.

 Sasori wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Silent king is utter garbage for his cost. Crons are presenting with one of the worst win rates in competitive. No way of knowing how many are running silent king. They all have access to him though.

You can still win a game with a model that is 100 points overvalued. Especially when the game revolves mostly around maneuver now - fighting inside what amounts to city blocks with very few fire lanes. So if that's what you mean by "fine" then I agree. He's still better than say a...land raider.

What are you talking about? Maybe that was true before the Codex, but not anymore.

Here is the quote from Goonhammer about that:

Necrons are back, baby
In news that shouldn’t be a shock, Necron usage is way up since the new book dropped. 524 games with Necrons were recorded in the ITC Battles app after the new books went on sale; this was more than any other faction save Space Marines (786), for whom a new book was also released. And in other news, the new book is a significant improvement over the last one, since there was really no way to go but up: Over this time, Necrons have won 54.4% of their games, and that’s a massive jump from the 37.7% win percentage they were posting before the new Codex. In our sample, new Necrons sport a 67% go-first win rate and a 45% go-second win rate, though these numbers will likely even out over time.

So they don't have anywhere near one of the worst winrates anymore.

Secondly, Necrons have already won several smaller RTT with Silent King lists, and they just came in 3rd at a larger GT here: https://www.40kstats.com/kentwargamesgt

If you think the Silent King is 100 points over pointed you are absolutely nuts, and you are demonstrably wrong about the Current Necron winrate.

https://d1w82usnq70pt2.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/40k_H2H_Faction_10-2020_FIXED.png
Head to head data for crons from the goonhammer article. It does not look good dude.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Silent king is utter garbage for his cost. Crons are presenting with one of the worst win rates in competitive. No way of knowing how many are running silent king. They all have access to him though.

You can still win a game with a model that is 100 points overvalued. Especially when the game revolves mostly around maneuver now - fighting inside what amounts to city blocks with very few fire lanes. So if that's what you mean by "fine" then I agree. He's still better than say a...land raider.

What are you talking about? Maybe that was true before the Codex, but not anymore.

Here is the quote from Goonhammer about that:

Necrons are back, baby
In news that shouldn’t be a shock, Necron usage is way up since the new book dropped. 524 games with Necrons were recorded in the ITC Battles app after the new books went on sale; this was more than any other faction save Space Marines (786), for whom a new book was also released. And in other news, the new book is a significant improvement over the last one, since there was really no way to go but up: Over this time, Necrons have won 54.4% of their games, and that’s a massive jump from the 37.7% win percentage they were posting before the new Codex. In our sample, new Necrons sport a 67% go-first win rate and a 45% go-second win rate, though these numbers will likely even out over time.

So they don't have anywhere near one of the worst winrates anymore.

Secondly, Necrons have already won several smaller RTT with Silent King lists, and they just came in 3rd at a larger GT here: https://www.40kstats.com/kentwargamesgt

If you think the Silent King is 100 points over pointed you are absolutely nuts, and you are demonstrably wrong about the Current Necron winrate.

https://d1w82usnq70pt2.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/40k_H2H_Faction_10-2020_FIXED.png
Head to head data for crons from the goonhammer article. It does not look good dude.

That's the Head to Head Data from October 2, of course it doesn't look good, that's before our new codex.

 Sasori wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Silent king is utter garbage for his cost. Crons are presenting with one of the worst win rates in competitive. No way of knowing how many are running silent king. They all have access to him though.

You can still win a game with a model that is 100 points overvalued. Especially when the game revolves mostly around maneuver now - fighting inside what amounts to city blocks with very few fire lanes. So if that's what you mean by "fine" then I agree. He's still better than say a...land raider.

What are you talking about? Maybe that was true before the Codex, but not anymore.

Here is the quote from Goonhammer about that:

Necrons are back, baby
In news that shouldn’t be a shock, Necron usage is way up since the new book dropped. 524 games with Necrons were recorded in the ITC Battles app after the new books went on sale; this was more than any other faction save Space Marines (786), for whom a new book was also released. And in other news, the new book is a significant improvement over the last one, since there was really no way to go but up: Over this time, Necrons have won 54.4% of their games, and that’s a massive jump from the 37.7% win percentage they were posting before the new Codex. In our sample, new Necrons sport a 67% go-first win rate and a 45% go-second win rate, though these numbers will likely even out over time.

So they don't have anywhere near one of the worst winrates anymore.

Secondly, Necrons have already won several smaller RTT with Silent King lists, and they just came in 3rd at a larger GT here: https://www.40kstats.com/kentwargamesgt

If you think the Silent King is 100 points over pointed you are absolutely nuts, and you are demonstrably wrong about the Current Necron winrate.

https://d1w82usnq70pt2.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/40k_H2H_Faction_10-2020_FIXED.png
Head to head data for crons from the goonhammer article. It does not look good dude.

That's the Head to Head Data from October 2, of course it doesn't look good, that's before our new codex.

Good point - thought this was post codex data. Still though. It goes to show - the real threat is quins and custodes. Not marines.

Jeez Xeno. I really don't know where to begin with this one. Maybe your suggestion that we compare him with a Crusader?

They're very different units that fulfill very different roles, but okay.

SK is drastically tougher. It's not even a close thing. It has ablatives that stop wounds from carrying over. It can hide in obscuring cover, and only has a 100mm base. It heals wounds. It has a 4++ rather than a 5++ that only works in shooting phase. It inflicts a really strong fight-last malus around it that can't be countered. It can deny one power and opens a strat to deny another, in a faction that otherwise, like knights, struggles to counter psyhic play.

This is a night-and-day kinda comparison here.

Next damage output. SK has shooting at S12, 8 and 6, hits on 2s. I'm happy to say that he dosen't match up to a krastader shooting, but it's still significant. In CC he pulls way ahead in number of attacks, damage and accuracy, not to mention the fact that he will never be one-banged by a smashcaptain, unlike our Crusader friend, and so can rest easier in initiating CC in the first place. His curse of the phaeron strat is just icing and a really good reason to shove him into your opponent if you manage to start a turn with him on only a few wounds left.

Next, buffs: it's not even close. One of the best buffers in the game.

Finally army-wide bonuses: again, not close. Not only does he let you meddle with protocols in powerful ways, but he increases your CP by 25%. Do we need to go in to what a single Crusader does to your CP?

Add it all up, slap on the fact that he's 50pts cheaper than the classic crusader and ... it feels a bit embarrasing that we're having this discussion!

I would insert a small device that randomly played Jerry Seinfelt or Woody Allen one liners when I pushed a button on his base.

'What's the deal with C'tans anyway? What does the C stand for? Crumbling? Is that why they are shards? Then what does the 'tan stand for? Is it because they did a lot of sunbathing?'

 grouchoben wrote:
Jeez Xeno. I really don't know where to begin with this one. Maybe your suggestion that we compare him with a Crusader?

They're very different units that fulfill very different roles, but okay.

SK is drastically tougher. It's not even a close thing. It has ablatives that stop wounds from carrying over. It can hide in obscuring cover, and only has a 100mm base. It heals wounds. It has a 4++ rather than a 5++ that only works in shooting phase. It inflicts a really strong fight-last malus around it that can't be countered. It can deny one power and opens a strat to deny another, in a faction that otherwise, like knights, struggles to counter psyhic play.

This is a night-and-day kinda comparison here.

Next damage output. SK has shooting at S12, 8 and 6, hits on 2s. I'm happy to say that he dosen't match up to a krastader shooting, but it's still significant. In CC he pulls way ahead in number of attacks, damage and accuracy, not to mention the fact that he will never be one-banged by a smashcaptain, unlike our Crusader friend, and so can rest easier in initiating CC in the first place. His curse of the phaeron strat is just icing and a really good reason to shove him into your opponent if you manage to start a turn with him on only a few wounds left.

Next, buffs: it's not even close. One of the best buffers in the game.

Finally army-wide bonuses: again, not close. Not only does he let you meddle with protocols in powerful ways, but he increases your CP by 25%. Do we need to go in to what a single Crusader does to your CP?

Add it all up, slap on the fact that he's 50pts cheaper than the classic crusader and ... it feels a bit embarrasing that we're having this discussion!

Not drastically tougher. T8 vs T7 is a huge breakpoint. Both will have a 4++ to shooting attacks. The knight is actually more durable to shooting. Plus has more wounds to give before becoming entirely useless.
Shooting. Huge win for Crusder. 2d6 blast str 8 ap-2 d3d range 72" + an Endless furry for 14 str 6 ap-2 flat 2 damage attacks doesnt even need that carapace weapon to outshoot it.
Sk has 2 str 12 ap-3 flat 6 damage shots (these shots disappear after you take 5 then 10 wounds)
3 str 8 ap-3 flat 2 shots (weaker than a redemptor plasma)
and 9 str 6 ap-1 shots with 1 damage. (1 more shot than the redemptor dreads secondary gatling gun)
So 2 mega shots that dissapear after 10 wounds and then you have less real firepower than a redemptor dread?

Seriously? Melee? The knight can fall back shoot and charge if melee is in the equation you are literally taking the crusders shooting profile and melee profile every turn. Which compared to the weak ass shooting of the SK after it takes 5 or 10 wounds. We are in the areana of...2x to 3x times as much damage coming out the knight.

Good thing though - because SK rerolls all hits for units that dont need it - immortals and warriors will almost always be under the effect of MWBD in any necron force. At least 2 of them anyways. Because these buffs literally have no where else to go. Reroll all wounds in melee for core and pretorians...not terrible overall...to bad none of these units are good in melee really other than praetorians.

SK best ability to the always fight last rule he has. Which is almost useless because he can be singled out first. Its amazing on a wolf lord with this ability because you are forced to engage it. Dont want to fight last in melee vs the SK? Just kill the sk. Not really that hard. If you can kill a knight....it is even easier to kill the SK.

Like I said - the only way his buffs make meaningful difference is with praetorians. Which serve an entirely different function in the army (flankers). I said you win an award if you can figure out how to get SK buffing praetorians in melee effectively.

SK wound reroll (which lasts till he's down to 15% health) is wickedly good for warriors, immortals, lychguard, and praetorians. He's a monster in a Novokh list; him plus the Novokh buffs turns literally any <CORE> unit into something scary to charge, especially if you can get him into combat too and make them fight last.

He's like the total opposite of a knight. Knights are low skill cap gatekeeper models - either they stomp on people or they get stomped. SK needs a patient player who has a plan and doesn't get distracted or make mistakes like feeling like they have to shoot his menhirs T1 and then ending up losing half his health as a result in return for blowing up a rhino or something.

yukishiro1 wrote:
SK wound reroll (which lasts till he's down to 15% health) is wickedly good for warriors, immortals, lychguard, and praetorians. He's a monster in a Novokh list; him plus the Novokh buffs turns literally any <CORE> unit into something scary to charge, especially if you can get him into combat too and make them fight last.

He's like the total opposite of a knight. Knights are low skill cap gatekeeper models - either they stomp on people or they get stomped. SK needs a patient player who has a plan and doesn't get distracted or make mistakes like feeling like they have to shoot his menhirs T1 and then ending up losing half his health as a result in return for blowing up a rhino or something.

Not disagreeing with you here. If he is being shot at you are losing the game. That is unacceptable for a 450 point model.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Not disagreeing with you here. If he is being shot at you are losing the game. That is unacceptable for a 450 point model.

Should all expensive models just be massive stat bricks that you plunk down to absorb fire?

Rule number one, guys.

Attack arguments, not people.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Rule number one, guys.

Attack arguments, not people.

This please.

I just went through and deleted a number of posts, if the conversation returns to such a path, warnings and suspensions will be issued, let's please not take it there, thanks!

Ok. Let's keep this civil and point out that Xenomancers - your exact words were "My necron force will quite literally murderize any space marine force". That's a quote, direct copy and paste. So you were unmistakably saying that your Necron list could beat any SM list. Now you are saying that Necrons are garbage because of win rate? A win rate you were wrong about? I notice that your profile pic and signature has updated to represent for Necrons - considering your history of downplaying your own faction, this doesn't feel like a coincidence? Can you explain any of this?

Necrons are pretty strong right now mate. Do they feel weak in your hands? What do you think that's a reflection of?